Over at The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg says that the “most consequential news from the Middle East today” is Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal’s promise to keep oil prices under $100 a barrel. Why does this matter? Argues Goldberg:

Because it clears the way for an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. I’m not suggesting coordination between Israel and Saudi Arabia on this, any more than I would ever suggest that Superpacs coordinate with presidential campaign staffs. I’m merely noting that one factor that inhibits Israel from striking at Iran is fear that an attack will cause Iran to retaliate against Persian Gulf shipping (among other things), which would cause oil prices to skyrocket, which would, of course, generate a fair amount of anger directed against Israel.

The “blame Israel first” crowd continues to interpret the Iran-US crisis as an example of a sinister Israel lobby pushing the US into a war to serve the ambitions of the Jewish state. Not only does this analysis miss the vital US interests at stake in the region and the threat Iran poses to a balance of power the United States needs, it misses the reality that for several years now some of the strongest, most consistent pressures on Washington to act against Iran have come from the Arab world.

The Arab Lobby’s strong pressure for war against Iran is a major factor in French, British and even German hawkishness as well in this crisis.

But the blame Israel firsters don’t care; if we have a war with Iran they will know who to blame.

Emphasis mine.So,it has come to pass that some Arabs indeed may agree with Jews on at least one issue...Ya think?Well, tis indeed a fact according to Wikileaks as I recall.I know Sunni and Shia have centuries in their collective histories of sectarian conflict. The Arab spring involves many regional countries in conflict with their governing regimes, and there is (in my opinion) a power struggle again between sects and Turkey-Iran as well for middle East control. Guess what,Israel nor the West had a part in the upheaval to any extent beyond the social net and the West's now apparent better way of life under democracy.

The Arab spring was a natural growth of Arab peoples wanting what they see in the despised America anddemocracy. Interesting what a look at democracy on the Internet can do huh? I hope SPRING moves into Iran. We should help with some fertilizer maybe?

I think maybe the most powerful group lobbying for war, seemingly always, are the large % of grumpy old war hawk citizenry that pressure, say, the US President into aggressive actions...and this works because this is such a large % of the voting pop and the President doesn't want to be seen as "soft" to these people. We're seeing it now in the GOP primaries and rhetoric vs Iran.

Quite frankly I think these people have massive logic holes in their brains much of the time, as they do not properly weigh the consequences of preventative/preemptive military actions. Vietnam and Iraq are obvious examples. It's mostly just "rah rah we gotta be tough cuz i'm so tough" chest-thumping nonsense based on faulty reasoning. Sometimes a country is all but forced into military action in defense of a REAL attack (ie: 1991 Gulf War), but these preventative and preemptive adventures seem to usually cause more harm than the perceived threat.

Not saying a strike isn't necessary vs Iran in this instance, but the costs nee to be weighed, but for some reason the same people are always quick to jump on the war train.

Will someone provide a list of Muslim countries with a good human rights record.

I'll start from the opposite end and work up...it's easier....

SUDAN

Point still stands...it is hypocrisy to listen to saudis when they themselves are not exactly the beacon of democracy. Afterall arabs are not exactly friends of Israel either and when it concerned matters regarding Israel violating UN resolutions arabs voice dId t exactly materialised.